~ politics for the people

An open letter to Angela Eagle about her hypocrisy

Angela Eagle: I couldn’t find a picture of her with her foot in her mouth.

You may be aware that a window at the Wallasey constituency office of Labour leadership challenger Angela Eagle was smashed with a brick overnight.

Ms Eagle was quick to blame the vandalism on supporters of Jeremy Corbyn, claiming that it was “bullying” against her that had “no place in politics in the UK and it needs to end”.

The hypocrisy of this outburst beggars belief (although perhaps we should understand it is par for the course as far as those who wish to unseat Jeremy Corbyn from the Labour leadership are concerned).

Consequently I have written an open letter to Ms Eagle, pointing out the inconsistencies between what she said today, her own actions, and those of her followers.

Feel free to copy and paste this letter, in whole or in part, for your own personal use, blog articles, newspaper articles, infographics or any other purpose to which you care to put it – as long as the meaning of the words is unchanged by whatever you do.

This is what I have written:

Dear Ms Eagle,

As a Labour voter of many years’ standing, and a member of the party for the last six, I am writing to express my outrage at your comments following the vandalism of the Wallasey party office.

We can agree that the damage to the window – like any crime – is unacceptable. However:

How dare you claim that it was carried out by a supporter of Jeremy Corbyn, “in his name”? Do you have any evidence? Do the police already know who did it? I think not – otherwise we would no doubt have heard about it.

In fact, Mr Corbyn has made it abundantly clear – many times over the past few weeks, that he finds such behaviour abhorrent and wants members of the party to discuss their differences in a cordial manner. This leads me to my second point:

How dare you try to pontificate to the rest of the party about “bullying”, after the behaviour you have forced Mr Corbyn to endure, together with the other 170+ PLP rebels?

Look at the behaviour that has occurred in YOUR name:

Months of secret plotting against Mr Corbyn after he won the Labour leadership last year;

The intention to mislead the public into thinking the Labour ‘coup’ was prompted by Mr Corbyn’s performance in the EU referendum when it had been pre-planned over many months;

The co-ordinated, on-the-hour resignations of shadow cabinet members throughout June 26 in an effort to BULLY Mr Corbyn out of the Labour leadership;

The purchase of a web domain entitled ‘Angela4Leader’ the day before those resignations;

The hasty and unconstitutional calling and passing of a vote of ‘no confidence’ in Mr Corbyn in another attempt to BULLY him out of office;

(It has been implied that some, or indeed many, Labour MPs were BULLIED into supporting that vote)

The attempted BULLYING of Mr Corbyn himself at a Parliamentary Labour Party meeting;

The many letters by your fellow Labour MPs, trying to BULLY Mr Corbyn into resigning; and

The fabricated smear stories intended to undermine Mr Corbyn’s support among members and, again, BULLY him into resigning – including your claim today about this broken office window.

If you are serious in your claim that bullying “has absolutely no place in politics in the UK and it needs to end”, then perhaps the best way to start would be by ending your own challenge to Mr Corbyn’s leadership, submitting yourself to the mercy of your constituents who are holding a ‘no confidence’ vote on your conduct later this month, and considering your own future in politics.

The constant machinations of a large number of Labour MPs over the past few months, which have vigorously and unremittingly denigrated a man of integrity and infinite compassion, will go down in the annals of political infamy.

Excellent letter Mike, and well thought out! Sadly though, I’m not entirely sure that Ms Eagle will even bother reading it in it’s entirety, when she gets the idea of where it’s going. I haven’t looked at her twitter account, but I get the feeling she doesn’t respond to many (if any) tweets, so I can’t see her responding to your letter.

Seconded. That did need to be said, however, will it fall on deaf ears? Those mutineers seem to be able to hear only their own voices and have shown utter contempt to the membership. They are not interested in our opinions, our feelings, our concerns, only our money. I am utterly disgusted. Who would have thought that £abour would behave in this manner? I am ashamed for them, for it is clear that shame is something with which the mutineers are unaccustomed and a concept which is alien to them.

I cannot understand how she can allow the lie by Tessa Jowells- that Eagle told her she was subjected to homophobic abuse at a CLP meeting she was not even at- to stand, having been widely circulated, and not refute or explain the lie. How she is not consistently held to account for that blatant smear tactic and, perhaps worse, false invocation of homophobia which is surely undermining and minimising to real reports of that very real hate crime when it does happen. How media who spread the incident far and wide did not spread the refutation of the incident by the chair of the meeting (who attended the wedding of her daughter to her daughter in law the following day). What it means is that truth is becoming devalued faster than the pound. How she can talk about ethics after that- well it’s just obvious propaganda isn’t it.

Well said. As a non Labour voter/supporter, I have seen the recent mass of false and damaging allegations, ranging from Anti-semetism, homophobia, Anti-women, and general bigotry, coming from a significant proportion of the PLP and it’s supporters. I have seen no apologies when these smears turned out to be wrong.

The same group(s) at the same time want to ignore the propaganda against the sick, disabled, the unemployed, etc, in case the Daily Mail will say mean things about them. (Wasn’t that one of the reasons for the abstension on the welfare vote?)

Now, either this group(s) is truly concerned about protecting the vulnerable, or else they want to use them as props in their mission for power. If the former they are going about things the wrong way.

I have seen more in the way of mutual aid, solidarity, and care for the vulnerable, the ‘acceptable’ targets of hate, etc, coming from the now pro Corbyn group than I have from the Anti’s, including from before there was even a chance that he could become leader. (Especially from people like Mike.)

She couldn’t give a dam! What she says is completely different to what she does, does she honestly believe she could win an election by backstabbing to grab power? I don’t think so! Those mps need to come out of the Westminster bubble and see they are on a hiding for nothing.

I echo the above comments to which I will add that there is no way I could ever imagine myself voting for such a personality; apart from the fact that I do not admire her interpretation of true Labour values.

While I agree with the sentiment of what you are saying (that Angela isn’t setting a great example on how to do politics in a friendly and respectful manner), I do feel you’re being dangerously dismissive of the attack on her office. When you say “We can agree that the damage to the window […] is unacceptable” you are implying that the only unacceptable thing is the fact that a window is broken and now needs to be fixed. It isn’t the damaged window that is unacceptable, it is the fact that it was a physical act made to intimidate Eagle and her staff. As many people have highlighted, the threats made both to Eagle and Corbyn are particularly worrying due to what happened with Jo Cox, and any acts of intimidation shouldn’t be dismissed as mere “vandalism”.

I’m sure this letter could send a very effective message on the importance of opponents of Corbyn conducting themselves in a better manner than they have done, but I think by tying it in with the office attack you (unintentionally, I’m sure) risk implying that playing dirty politics is just as bad as these physical acts of intimidation.

I think if we want Corbyn to maintain the support of the wider electorate (and party membership) we need to be more friendly in our own way. Right now many people see us as “the bad guys”, and Corbyn will never succeed if his supporters are seen to be shrugging their shoulders over “window damage”.

We don’t know that it was an act intended to intimidate Angela Eagle and her staff. It seems to have given her ammunition to throw at supporters of Jeremy Corbyn – no matter whether they committed the crime or not – so we may speculate on whether that was the intention. You have no evidence to prove otherwise.

Playing dirty politics is indeed as bad as acts of intimidation. You do realise that politicians affect people’s lives in tangible ways? A Labour government that, for example, does not close down ESA, PIP and any other benefits based on the work capability assessment and replace them with something fair will be giving approval to the thousands of premature deaths that have happened so far, along with any that take place in the future. Those are deaths, not threats.

Supporters of Mr Corbyn are indeed friendly – or at least cordial. He has requested this behaviour and we are obliging. If you want to find the perpetrators of these acts, look elsewhere. Nobody who commits them does so in Jeremy Corbyn’s name.

How is playing dirty politics as bad as (illegal) acts of intimidation? Your comment almost seems to be suggesting that intimidation of an MP (however disagreeable her view) is justified, just because there are lives on the line. That doesn’t sound like a fair democracy to me.

I’m a Corbyn supporter, but these rather radical views of some other supporters are tarnishing his reputation, and causing significant damage to the likelihood of his reelection.

Sadly you are in denial if you think all other Corbyn supporters are friendly or cordial: just 2 days ago I saw my MP was told on twitter to drown for not supporting him.

We need to accept that many of those who support Corbyn are saying and doing awful things (as are those who are anti-Corbyn). We need to severely condemn these actions, and not try and pretend that they aren’t happening.

How do you get from dirty politics being as bad as intimidation to suggesting that intimidation is justified? You can’t. It doesn’t follow.
Dirty politics is bad for the reasons I gave. Did you not read my reply to you? Read it again – and think, this time.
As I – and Mr Corbyn, in fact – indicated, messages such as the one you quote are not by supporters of Mr Corbyn. He disowns them. As he said, they are not done in his name. Whoever the perpetrator is, he or she is acting alone.

At 60 years old and disabled I find it mildly amusing that Eagle could tar me with the same brush as she is quite happy to the other Corbyn supporters. The idea of me being labelled a possible “thug” would seriously undermine her credibility as it would for the majority of JC’s supporters. Her attack by association is a bullying tactic in itself and is risible given the behaviour of her and the many other Tory Lite MP’s who have as you described, resorted to so many different and dishonest bullying efforts.
In one fell move she has managed to alienate more than half of the Labour Party membership and has shown herself to be a scheming and conniving creature of the same ilk as previous well known Labour representatives, one of whom could yet be facing criminal charges. Why on earth would she want to put herself in the same boat as a person who 76% of the country want tried for war crimes? I suppose it is a good example of the calibre of Jeremy’s opposition. Despite trying to buy votes at £25 per head and trying to negate a 100,000 upsurge in membership, I really don’t think that these Blue Labour have any awareness of how they are perceived.
You do know she will not likely reply, don’t you?
What could she possibly say to excuse her actions?

You are telling the media that you owe it to Labour voters to mount this challenge.

Last year I/we voted for our Labour candidate most reluctantly, as a slightly lesser evil than our Conservative one, but doubting that that Labour candidate, engaged with big business, was really a socialist. It was very depressing.

Then Jeremy Corbyn appeared as if out of nowhere, giving us a fresh and unexpected hope. This hope was accompanied by a wonderous regeneration of Labour membership and involvement, and an increase in Labour voters. Yet instead of welcoming this, many of you have found it unacceptable. Why?

It is this hope that you and your fellow conspirators have plotted to remove from us, for reasons which can have nothing to do with our interests, about which you obviously don’t care, but much more likely to do with background corporate interests. Shame on you.

If you feel you do owe us anything, as you say, then please stand down and allow us to have a leader of hope.

So, a brick through a window is violence, and bullying, but voting to drop megaton bombs on people’s heads is the compassionate thing to do?

Calling someone a ‘Blairite’ is beyond the pale, but falsely accusing a group of people of homophobia is fine.

The violence of a benefit sanction is ok, forcing people to use foodbanks is ok, forced labour is ok, stealing 30 quid a week of the chronically ill is ok, but a broken plane of glass is going too far?

Oh grow up dear – Corbyn is leader of the Labour Party and wants to be PM – he and his cultists have to be able to take criticism without calling it ‘bullying’ – this is not the school yard.
I suppose you’ve noticed how the PM gets ‘bullied’ every week at PMQs?

Have voted socialist for many years, but will think seriously about withdrawing my support if Angela Eagle and her cowardly supporters succeed in getting rid of Jeremy Corbyn. Fron Marian Sawczuk – Leicester

How many black and brown people are our political elites allowed to kill before the victims lives equal the value placed by the corporate media, on one white, pro-war careerist’s office window?

In the years following the war, Iraq became the fifth largest source of American oil imports. It’s still the second largest source of global supply. Yet, despite siezing control of the financially rich oil virtually immedialty, in the aftermath of the war, Iraq’s hospitals remained criminally under-supplied; basics like electricity and running water were not consistently available. All of this exacerbated the colossal loss of life and pitched Iraqi against Iraqi.

This is the imperialism for which Angela Eagle voted. Hardly surprising she voted against having official Iraq War enquiries like Chilcot. For God’s sake black & brown lives matter blairities. In the 60 John Profumo resigned from public life after simply having relations with a woman also having sex with a Russian official. Against all Labour traditions, Eagle was party to racist-imperialism, mass murder and the torture to which Obama has subsequently admitted. And now thinks she should be boss of the historically anti-racist Labour Part.

Given her track record of supporting racist-imperialism, does any one think Angela Eagle is the candidate that Nelson Mandela, Archbishop Desmond Tuttu, Muhammad Ali, Malcom X and Martin Luther King – who opposed the Vietnam War – would support?
Labour is the Party which welcomed Paul Robeson, Muhammad Ali supported Dr King and opposed the imperialist conquest of Vietnam. Where does Angela Eagle remotely fit into this history?
Common Labour you’re better than this!

Subscribe via email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.